Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Funds Sci-Fi Technology

Posted by michael on from the thinking-different dept.

Michael Huang writes "Wired News profiles the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC), the $4 million-a-year agency most famous for Bradley Edwards' study of the space elevator. Lesser known studies include weather control, shape-shifting space suits and antimatter-powered probes to Alpha Centauri. Remember, 'if it's not risky, it's not going to get funded'."

46 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds familiar by Carnildo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Gee. Sounds like Heinlein's "Long Range Foundation".

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  2. What? by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Funny

    NASA is getting into space things? That's odd.

    1. Re:What? by linzeal · · Score: 5, Funny
      Nasa getting into sci-fi would be like the US Military getting into video games, never going to happen.

      --
      An Education is the Font of All Liberty
    2. Re:What? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 2

      Those were great books.
      While a computer rgp like you describe doesn't exit, there was a "zork with slideshow" style game based on the first couple of novella's in the original series. However this was a long time ago and for the life of me I can't remember if it was for Dos or Commodore 64.
      There is also a regular, pen and paper, roleplaying game based on the two Amber series of novel put out by Phage Press, the game was diceless, based on some interesting concepts.
      For example it was a point buy system for most things. Including attributes, but your relative rank to the other players in primary attribues was decided in an auction, this also determined how many points you needed to go up later.
      And you could even spend more points than you had, or save some. Of course being in the hole on points meant you had bad karma (if your in debt to the cosmos,it WILL extract interest till you pay off).
      Sadly I think Phage press went dodo, so finding the main book or either of the expansions might be a bit hard. It was however really cool.
      The first book was main rules and covered the stuff in the Corwin saga. The first expansion had all the new stuff from the Merlin stories, and the second expansion was supposed to be about Atrifacts of science and or magic and related things. (I want my own Ghostweel please!)
      Sorry for the off topic drift down memory lane, but Nostalgia kinda took over.

      Mycroft.

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  3. I hope they keep their funding... by James+A.+O.+Joyce · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I skimmed the article summary I was going to write a comment complaining th at NASA should be investing in "proven technologeis". After all, it's the "proven technologeis" that help us about our daily lifes and help us fulfilll ourselves: space elevators don't enter into it, right? Besides, NASA needs to bring in some green and they can only do that by making proprietry software and crafts.

    But then I realised something important; no matter how important it is for NASA to make money, we still have to spend money to make money. Even if spending money on space lifts causes taxes to get nothced up by a few dollars, it will all be worth it in a few decades because we will all benefit from the advanced cabling tech. Besides, every dollar that's spent on this is another dolll ar that isn't spent on military applications or other less savoury things.

    Still, judging by their website, I'm a little suspicious of what they're up to! ;-) I guess their just busy working on something cool like transforming space suits, heh. Keep up the good articals, simoniger. (The shape-shifting space suits are almost certainly more useful than the shape-shifting trainers I saw linkked on Fark, anyway.)

    --
    nigritude ultramarine
    1. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by ziggy_zero · · Score: 2, Informative

      As Buckminster Fuller said, we should focus more on "livingry" rather than weaponry.

      --
      I belong to the ______ generation.
    2. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by theM_xl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Aye, if everyone only invests in "proven techonologies" we can forget about progress... Sure, we'll probably refine things, but some new ones would be nice. We can't rely on the guys in basements to do everything... Somebody has to do the hard science that at least on the surface offers little. If the NASA is the one to do it, more power -and funding- to them.

    3. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Funny

      Buckminster Fuller. Now that guy had balls.

    4. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by DShard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And honestly, space elevators are not as far fetched an idea as they sounded when I first read about them in Kim Stanley Robinsons' Mars series. What it would return when we work out the tech is a solar system of resources at or disposal. With the price of bringing up and down cargo going to dollars a pound, the potential is breathtaking. There are worse pipe dreams to invest in.

    5. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Nerd+With+Nalgene · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, that's more than a little optimistic. Theoretically, having a single space elevator might drop the price for lifting material to geosync to under a thousand dollars a kilogram. That's still a big improvement over tens of thousands, but it doesn't mean you'll be sending up your kids' science projects anytime soon.

      --


      "as if nothing were solid...and that would be the end of the world, not fire and brimstone, but goo."--Rand
    6. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by red+floyd · · Score: 2, Informative

      The idea of the space elevator is about 35 years old. Yuri Artusanov (spelling?) came up with the idea circa 1968, and Arthur C. Clarke ran with it in "The Fountains of Paradise". The anchor point's name of "Clarke" in the Mars series was a tribute.

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    7. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by xmath · · Score: 5, Informative
      Quoting the site:
      The first space elevator would reduce lift costs immediately to $100 per pound, as compared to current launch costs, which are $10,000-$40,000 per pound, depending upon destination and choice of rocket launch system.

      Plus, if you look at their studies it seems they have figured out pretty much everything already. The only technical detail they're waiting for is a sufficiently strong carbon nanotube composite to make the cable of, and they're already making good progress there. After that, apparently it becomes just an engineering/funding problem.

      Of course the studies could be mistaken, but still it's definitely not in the pure "Sci-Fi" category anymore. With a bit of luck, we'll still live to see it built. :-)

    8. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If GE invents superior cabling, then only GE and its licensees get to use it, and they pass the cost on to you, the consumer. If NASA invents superior cabling, then everybody (including GE) can use it to deliver better products (including suspension bridges) at a lower price.

      Government expenditure on science is an investment by the people of the US (or whatever country is doing the spending) -- and one which (especially in the case of NASA) has quite often had a rate of return on investment which few if any private R&D operations can match.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by cft_128 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      In other words, if GE wanted to invent superior cabling, I could buy more stock to fund the project, and thus profit from the super-long suspension bridges that would be built. If NASA invented superior cabling, I get to pay more taxes so they can build a space elevator, which I would then be charged additional money to use.

      The problem with this is the vast majority of people are too short sighted to do this, it takes government (tax) money where an immediate profit is not needed to invest in these type of projects. People were shocked when Honda started getting into jet engines and said that the new division would not turn a profit for more than ten years, and that is just refining old technologies, not ground breaking new ones.

      Imagine the investor response if GE said "We are going to build a space elevator, it will take us at least 25 years to complete it and cost the majority of our R&D budget for the whole time frame". That investor money would be voluntarily moved to Microsoft where (relatively) short term growth is much more likely.

      Rather than say "a dollar spent on NASA pipe dreams is a dollar taken from the public" I would say "A dollar spend on a NASA pipe dream is a dollar invested in the public's future". Not all investments pan out but many do.

      --

      Underloved Movies and Pub Quiz: donotquestionme.org

    10. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      >> Buckminster Fuller. Now that guy had balls.

      Yeah, but really tiny ones.

    11. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Saige · · Score: 4, Informative

      Cause, of course, we haven't seen every single technical article that describes the space elevator in any sort of techincal detail mention that it would be a wide but extremely thin ribbon that, were it ever to break or be cut, would float down with not even enough kinetic energy to hurt a person. That coupled with the fact that any sections not far enough into the atmosphere to be slowed that way would, upon reentering the atmosphere and building up a bit of heat, disintegrate.

      In other words, if their engineering ideas are even close, the only place we'll see a big disaster caused by a space elevator cable coming down is fiction.

      --
      "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
    12. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it's scientifically impossible, it's not science fiction - it's fantasy. The space elevator is something that we (meaning humans) pretty much knew would be possible eventually. Hence, the pure sci-fi category is not a bad place to be.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Anything worthwhile can be paid for by voluntarily invested money instead of tax dollars.
      If there's any chance that it will generate a financial return within 5 years.

      Fundamental science and the development of key engineering concepts do not pay back that soon. It took decades between the discovery of the structure of DNA and when people started making money off it. Top quarks are not paying anyone's commercial salary other than researchers and a few large particle accellerator component manufacturers.... this decade. But who knows.

      Doing studies like this tells us what engineering and directed science developments will be useful in the future, by pointing out applications and providing directions for research. Without them, nobody can tell ahead of time what the uses for and payback for new nanotube fibers might be, the uses for antimatter containment, large lasers, etc.

      That long term funding lets investors say "Ok, we could see making money at this" and then they may invest.

      The rise of technological society has been on the back of publically funded research, often followed by commercial development. The benefits of having some people looking out a ways on the public dime is well demonstrated. TCP/IP anyone?

      Disclaimer: I have before, and will again, applied for NIAC project funding.

    14. Re:I hope they keep their funding... by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They can have my dollar. As much as I like to see shit getting blown up, I would rather see a dollar going into some hair brained Nasa scheme than some black hole millitary project. Who's sole purpose is to kill people.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

  4. Be honest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Be honest, you were outraged to hear that funding was given to wacky pseudo-science projects, weren't you?

    1. Re:Be honest... by Reorax · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was outraged to hear that funding was given to their wacky pseudo-science projects. Still nothing for my magnetic levitation air-hockey table.

      --
      This sig is only here so people stop skipping the last lines of my posts.
  5. Reminds me of a quote by jafo · · Score: 5, Funny

    This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes, by Gordon Moore: "If everything you try works, you're not trying hard enough."

    Sean

  6. Do they have 500 Altairan dollars for by Intocabile · · Score: 5, Funny

    .. for the triple-breasted whore of Eroticon 6? Or is that not risky enough?

  7. 250x less by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It costs more than 250 times their yearly budget to fly one shuttle mission...That is a sad joke, I bet there budget is less than what NASA spends each year to fly the NASA highups around the country.

  8. Heh... by Burgundy+Advocate · · Score: 4, Funny
    Re-fund Orion.

    ...then Superfund the United States!

    --
    Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
    1. Re:Heh... by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would definitly want to see Greenpeace protesting against that one. The standard Greenpeace protest involves chaining themselfs against whatever they are protesting against.

      Just picture this:

      1) build nuclear launch system.
      2) Allow greenpeace hippies to chain themselfs to launch system.
      3) Launch system.
      4) Annouce the first hippies in space to the world.

  9. The most important thing said in the article by cft_128 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The most important thing said in the article was a quote by an analyst "It's impossible to make breakthroughs if all you're funding is immediate, near-term applications".

    In society today we all seem to concentrate on short term benefits and ignore the long term consequences, be it government budget deficits, long term research funding, balking at online music distribution, moving jobs off shore or the environment.

    --

    Underloved Movies and Pub Quiz: donotquestionme.org

  10. Space Elevator is not sci-fi by Nerd+With+Nalgene · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My dad has worked with Brad Edwards on the Space Elevator extensively, and I can tell you from experience that it is not wacky science fiction. It is a six billion dollar investment that isn't likely to appear anytime soon. However, it is almost certain to happen within the next thirty to forty years. While it is nice that the government can handle that kind of long-range vision occasionally, if they are the only ones providing investment into technologies like this one then they will end up controlling those technologies. What would really be nice is if the private sector could see into the future too and fund some of this kind of stuff without NASA's help.

    --


    "as if nothing were solid...and that would be the end of the world, not fire and brimstone, but goo."--Rand
    1. Re:Space Elevator is not sci-fi by demachina · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lets see, the U.S. spends six billion dollars in less than a month on the circus in Iraq which isn't producing any useful result. The U.S. has spent 6 or 7 times this on the F-22 and its still barely in limited production. Estimates very but the F-22 will run $200-$300 million a pop. Kind of shows you how screwed up our priorities are.

      I really doubt the major powers will let a private company own a space elevator. It will so dramatically alter the balance of power I wager the U.S., E.U., Russia, China, Japan and India in particular will vie for control of it as soon as the technology arrives to make it look viable. It will be interesting to see if it becomes the object of a new space race which will be the BEST way to insure that it actually gets built. You have to wonder if the world will pull together and build one or will fight like cats and dogs and we end up with 3 or 4.

      Don't recall if it has to be based at the equator. If it does when it becomes viable it will be interesting to see the major powers vie for control of the best spots for the base on the equator.

      --
      @de_machina
  11. Science fiction inevitably becomes fact... by Humorously_Inept · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's too bad that a defenseless program like this is just the sort that would be hacked apart if some hackney news agency decided to do an expose on the $4m it gets. I'm sure John Stossel could paint horns on it.

    Even outlandish ideas deserve study. This isn't "duh" stuff like the speed at which ketchup comes out of the bottle, etc. I think it's important to keep an eye out on the horizon and if a couple bucks is enough motivation, then go for it!

    --

    ~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
  12. Corny as it may be? by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd like to see more research into replicator technology (maybe we will get there after enough nano-research?)
    If we get replicators, we can solve a lot of problems at once:

    - Food, nobody would have to grow hungry again
    - Money, nobody would need it ever again
    - Fuel, no more dependancies on oil
    - Nuclear waste/pollution, easy to clean that up now
    - Living forever, refreshing the building blocks of our bodies
    - etc.

    The only problem I can see here (and I'm sure there are more) is nano-warfare. As in "Let's make a nanobot that can kill all people with a certain DNA profile", that's the only thing I'm afraid of.

    I think it will take a long time before we finally have that technology, but I'm afraid I won't live to see that (and I'm still hoping to have about 70 years ahead of me to live to the ripe old age of 95)

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
    1. Re:Corny as it may be? by painandgreed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd like to see more research into replicator technology (maybe we will get there after enough nano-research?) If we get replicators, we can solve a lot of problems at once:

      - Food, nobody would have to grow hungry again
      - Money, nobody would need it ever again
      - Fuel, no more dependancies on oil
      - Nuclear waste/pollution, easy to clean that up now
      - Living forever, refreshing the building blocks of our bodies
      - etc.

      You're high. Successful nanotech replictors probaly wouldn't solve any of those problems. It does not allow for escaping from the law of conservation of mass and energy. Materials are still going to take resources and energy to manufacture. both are commodities that, even if cheap, will prevent free replication. We'll be able to make our own oil but the energy to do that will have to come from someplace and might not be efficient as simply running electric cars to begin with. In fact, it may still be cheaper to pump the stuff out of the ground and use it. It might even still be cheaper to grow food naturally.

    2. Re:Corny as it may be? by king-manic · · Score: 4, Insightful


      - Food, nobody would have to grow hungry again
      - Money, nobody would need it ever again
      - Fuel, no more dependancies on oil
      - Nuclear waste/pollution, easy to clean that up now
      - Living forever, refreshing the building blocks of our bodies

      -Food: We can already fend off hunger, it's socio economic reasons why we don't. Food distribution, international politics cause grain and other excess food goods to be stored/rott instead of eaten, not supply. Replicators would not help this. Chances are they would require electricity to operate and most places with low food levels also don't have electricity.
      -money: Money is an idea, its a innovation to quantify the value of "work" or "goods". If replicators worked, they would require power, and then power and base materials would become the basis of a monetary system. Also replicators aren't magic, nanobots would still require base amterials and could only make things according to what is available. It's likly it will make manufacturing moot if it worked exactly liek you think it should.
      -Fuel: We will need more, it doesn' solve fuel problems it woudl create it. We dont' yet know the power requirements a replicator would need, but changing matter require energy. If it work just a syou think (ie, make anything you tell it to out of base materials) We'd need a lot of energy. If your thinking of the magical Star trek replicators it's going to need even more energy (and also a major major innovation in physics to overcome the uncertainty principle.)
      -Nuclear waste: Again nano machiens aren't magic They might be able to convert 8h2so4 into 8 h2 1 s8 and 16 o2 but it can't make pu-242 into 50 h2o.
      -Living forever: It may someday result in this, This is a fairly realistic possibiltity but not for a good long time. Even then you may run into some problems, like memory. IF your 350 can your brain remember enough to keep you functional, will we hae to invent a forgetting machine lest we fill up our brains? This one might happen I doubt the other 4 will.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  13. Hurricane shifters...... by j3ll0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The one thing that I like about the idea for shifting the hurricane is that when there wasn't a hurricane to be shifted, you could redirect all that energy onto a bank of photovoltaic cells.

    Of course...the one thing I don't like about the idea is that us humans don't have a whole lot of success in anticipating the consequences of fucking around with nature :)

  14. Risky Sci-Fi projects funded?? by dos4who · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..How about trying to get CowboyNeal a date?

    ~m

    --
    "Yes, I have a Disaster Recovery Plan. It's called my Resume"
  15. A modest proposal by icekillis · · Score: 4, Funny

    A modest proposal: Instead of just posting an article every time a Wired Article comes out, slashdot should just made a special section feeding everything from Wired.

  16. 4 Milion.. is pocket change by NoMercy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Goverments deal in milions, 50 milion there, 20 milion there, the cost of some piece of stupid artwork to stick at the end of a bridge cost a insane ammount of money while another piece of local-goverment artwork is spiraling though milions of dolars while its schedule is pushed furthur and furthur back...

    Benifit of this is, a) the costs are fixed, b) we might just get that anti-mater powered probe to aplha-centuri ;)

  17. Web page desing by notany · · Score: 2, Funny

    At least they are not any of that 4 000 000$ year to web designers. That's allways a good sign.
    The homepage looks absolutely horrible!!

    --
    Dyslexics have more fnu.
  18. The Fountains of Paradise by DeepBlueDiver · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe this concept (or one very similar) Arthur C Clarke aired in his book 2061.

    He was just re using the concept he presented for the first time in "The Fountains of Paradise" (1978).
    Great book, BTW.

  19. Robert A Heinlein by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Reminds me of this novel where there's an organzation that won't finance something unless it's crazy and has no chance of succeeding. I believe its motto was Bread cast upon water multplies sevenfold. In the novel the organization finances a novel way of communicating between Earth and starships.

    --
    This guy is way out there
    1. Re:Robert A Heinlein by Carnildo · · Score: 2

      Yes, the Long Range Foundation. The actual criteria was that if any potential payoff was at least a century in the future, the project had a chance of being funded.

      Of course, they had a slight problem with projects paying off too soon.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  20. My risky proprosal: by Saeger · · Score: 3, Funny
    Dear NASA,

    Here is my 'sci-fi' grant proposal. I hope you approve:

    1. Wait for advanced nanotechnology and brain-scanning tech to emerge over the next 25 years. I'll still need funding during this period to analyze the research landscape for suitable bla bla (i.e. sit on my ass.)
    2. Launch a 'seed' probe using the old space elevator.
    3. Have the seed probe attach to any unclaimed, suitably-sized asteroid and self-assemble the solar arrays, dish, and computing substrate necessary for a couple million transhuman beings + "matrix" environment.
    4. "Broadcast" the willing scanned human minds from Earth for $0/lb (and let the bio-luddites join the dinosaurs.)
    5. Grow our new home into a dyson-sphere-sized Matrioshka Brain around the Sun to add to the "missing [thinking] matter" out there. :)
    6. No profit.

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  21. for those who don't get the above joke... by funny-jack · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, Mr. Fuller had domes. The balls referred to above have his name in honor of the domes.

    --
    You probably shouldn't click this.
  22. Re:hmmmm by MisterLawyer · · Score: 2, Informative
    Well the best hope in my humbel opinion is the research may lead to better materials for seatbelts and bullet proof vests ..... the world needs a better 10 micron seatbelt....

    To clarify a little something for any non-physicists out there: Seat belts are designed to distribute force evenly across the strongest parts of a vehicle occupant's body (the hips and chest). We already have materials strong enough that 10 microns could restrain an accident victim, but a 10-micron seat belt would cut through your flesh, probably down to the bone in the case of an accident.

    In other words, the world does not need a better 10 micron seat belt.

  23. NIAC by dmouw25 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recently attended one of their conferences as a one of the student presenters. This is not a waste of money. Their grants come in two phases with the first one about $60,000 and the second phase much more. The amount they give is miniscule compared to potential rewards. As far as the space elevator, before I went to the conference I thought it was a joke as well, but it is a very viable concept. In response to the guy who made the comment about protecting it from planes, this will be constructed in the ocean and it would be very easy for a year round no fly zone. Also, if I remember correctly, the location was choosen because this area is storm free year round, but I am not sure on this point.

  24. More at Defense Tech by noahmax · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a whole bunch more on NASA's way-out research over here.